| Literature DB >> 36010491 |
Hongying Cai1,2, Daojie Li1, Liye Song1, Xin Xu1, Yunsheng Han1, Kun Meng1, Zhiguo Wen1, Peilong Yang1,2.
Abstract
Obesity has become a major social problem related to health and quality of life. Our previous work demonstrated that Lactobacillus plantarum FRT10 alleviated obesity in high-fat diet (HFD)-fed mice by alleviating gut dysbiosis. However, the underlying functions of FRT10 in regulating liver and cecum contents metabolism remain unknown. Liver and cecum contents metabonomics combined with pathway analysis based on ultraperformance liquid chromatography-quadrupole-time-of-flight mass spectrometry (UHPLC-Q-TOF/MS) were performed to evaluate the alterations of metabolic profiles between obese control mice and obese mice in FRT10-treated groups. The orthogonal partial least squares discriminant analysis (OPLS-DA) score plots showed that there were significant differences in cecum contents and liver markers between experimental groups. In total, 26 potential biomarkers were identified in the liver and 15 in cecum contents that could explain the effect of FRT10 addition in HFD-fed mice. In addition, gut-liver axis analysis indicated that there was a strong correlation between cecum contents metabolites and hepatic metabolites. The mechanism of FRT10 against obesity might be related to the alterations in glycerophospholipid metabolism, primary bile acid biosynthesis, amino metabolism, and purine and pyrimidine metabolism. Studies on these metabolites could help us better understand the role of FRT10 in obesity induced by HFD.Entities:
Keywords: Lactobacillus plantarum FRT10; UHPLC-QTOF/MS; biomarker; gut–liver axis; metabolomics; obesity
Year: 2022 PMID: 36010491 PMCID: PMC9407591 DOI: 10.3390/foods11162491
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1Score plots and permutation test of liver metabolites after L. plantarum FRT10 intervention in ESI+ mode. (A) OPLS-DA score plots between HF10L and HF groups. (B) OPLS-DA score plots between HF10H and HF groups. (C) Permutation test of OPLS-DA model between HF10L and HF groups. (D) Permutation test of OPLS-DA model between HF10H and HF groups.
Metabolites alterations in liver between FRT10 treatment group and obese control group.
| Metabolites | RT (s) | Fold Change | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HF10L vs. HF | HF10H vs. HF | |||
| Choline | 780.035 | 104.1058352 | 0.83 * | 1.55 * |
| Glycerophosphocholine | 862.561 | 258.1094388 | 0.61 + | 0.51 + |
| CDP-choline | 878.204 | 489.1135327 | - | 0.52 + |
| Phosphorylcholine | 717.05 | 242.0794821 | 0.28 * | 0.63 * |
| sn-Glycerol 3-phosphoethanolamine | 788.63 | 198.0517674 | - | 0.67 * |
| Taurocholic acid | 413.829 | 498.2875244 | 0.30 * | - |
| Cholic acid | 391.737 | 373.2730818 | 0.45 * | - |
| Phenyllactic acid | 521.458 | 149.0586964 | 1.18 * | 1.18 * |
| L-Phenylalanine | 542.1065 | 166.0855048 | 1.29 * | 1.27 * |
| Tyramine | 521.673 | 120.0799482 | 1.21 * | 1.21 * |
| L-Threonine | 704.9 | 120.0647667 | 1.23 * | 1.21 * |
| D-Ornithine | 1012.455 | 115.0853902 | 1.18 * | 1.24 * |
| L-Asparagine | 750.138 | 133.0599344 | 1.16 * | 1.12 + |
| D-Proline | 1012.13 | 116.0694156 | 1.17 * | 1.27 * |
| L-Pyroglutamic acid | 745.28 | 147.0754241 | 1.33 * | - |
| L-Histidine | 1015.6 | 156.0760477 | 1.22 + | 1.25 + |
| Thymine | 283.614 | 127.0491779 | 1.45 + | - |
| Thymidine | 180.4075 | 241.0827884 | 3.33 * | 2.66 * |
| Uracil | 149.349 | 111.0197557 | 1.56 * | 1.65 * |
| Allantoin | 367.132 | 159.0505486 | 1.23 * | - |
| Uridine | 321.659 | 245.0764623 | 0.55 * | 0.45 * |
| Inosine | 236.175 | 249.0626869 | 1.63 * | 1.86 * |
| Hypoxanthine | 412.355 | 137.0448623 | 0.16 + | 0.53 + |
| Xanthine | 428.656 | 151.0258253 | 4.90 * | 2.24 + |
| Xanthosine | 394.365 | 283.067998 | 2.24 * | 2.38 * |
| Deoxyinosine | 325.282 | 251.078228 | 2.94 * | - |
The ratio between HF10L vs. HF or HF10H vs. HF is shown in the table as fold change. “*” indicates significant differences in metabolites between the two groups compared with VIP > 1 and p < 0.05. “+” indicates marked differences in metabolites between the two groups compared with VIP > 1 and 0.05 < p < 0.1. RT retention time.
Figure 2Score plots and permutation test of cecum contents after L. plantarum FRT10 intervention in ESI+ and ESI− mode. (A) OPLS-DA score plots between HF10L and HF groups. (B) OPLS-DA score plots between HF10H and HF groups. (C) Permutation test of OPLS-DA model between HF10L and HF groups. (D) Permutation test of OPLS-DA model between HF10H and HF groups.
Metabolites alterations in cecum contents between HF10L and HF groups.
| Metabolites | RT (s) | Fold Change | |
|---|---|---|---|
| PC(O-16:0/2:0) | 330.811 | 524.3154739 | 0.65 |
| PC(0:0/20:4(5Z,8Z,11Z,14Z)) | 401.017 | 543.3885338 | 0.02 |
| PC(O-8:0/O-8:0) | 469.048 | 482.3602632 | 1.94 |
| PC(O-14:1(1E)/0:0) | 286.959 | 451.3413931 | 1.64 |
| LysoPC(18:1(9Z)) | 458.095 | 478.2949417 | 0.14 |
| LysoPC(20:3(5Z,8Z,11Z)) | 458.234 | 545.4042362 | 0.14 |
| LysoPE(0:0/20:0) | 477.56 | 510.3550402 | 0.14 |
| LysoPE(0:0/20:4(5Z,8Z,11Z,14Z)) | 392.452 | 501.3202624 | 2.69 |
| PS(18:2(9Z,12Z))/22:6(4Z,7Z,10Z,13Z,16Z,19Z) | 508.345 | 832.5033673 | 0.14 |
| PA(18:0/18:1(9Z)) | 558.79 | 700.557389 | 9.78 |
| 1-Palmitoyl-2-linoleoyl PE | 540.667 | 715.4910486 | 0.68 |
| 2-amino-3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)propanoic acid | 216.208 | 197.1284116 | 0.61 |
| Cholic acid | 392.413 | 373.2732771 | 1.70 |
| Taurocholic acid | 302.382 | 514.2852392 | 0.42 |
| Xanthine | 62.5003 | 152.0540194 | 1.83 |
PC—phosphatidylcholine; PA—phosphatidic acid; PE—phosphatidylethanolamine; PS—phosphatidylserine; LysoPCs—lysophosphatidylcholines; LysoPE—lysophosphoethanolamine; RT—retention time.
Figure 3Schematic diagram of the metabolic pathway of FRT10 intervention in obesity according to metabolites analysis of liver and cecum contents. Blue indicated the presence of metabolites in the liver, red indicated the presence of metabolites in cecum contents, and green indicated the presence of metabolites in both liver and cecum contents. ↑ indicated an upward trend and ↓ indicated a downward trend. DAG—diglyceride; TG—triacylglycerols; SAM—S-adenosylmethionine; SAH—S-adenosine homocysteine; PC—phosphatidylcholine; PA—phosphatidic acid; PS—phosphatidylserine; PE—phosphatidylethanolamine.